But on the negative side, Sweden has one of the world’s biggest welfare states. Even after the spending restraint of the 1990s, the public sector consumes about 50 percent of economic output. And that necessitates a punitive tax code.

Today, let’s build on our understanding of Sweden by looking at how the country’s welfare state interacts with the immigration system.

Writing for CapX, Nima Sanandaji discusses these issues in his adopted country of Sweden.

Sweden has had an unusually open policy towards refugee and family immigrants. The Swedish Migration Agencyestimates that around 105,000 individuals will apply for asylum only this year, corresponding to over one percent of Sweden’s entire population.

This openness is admirable, but is it successful? Are immigrants assimilating and contributing to Sweden’s economy?

Unfortunately, the answer in many cases is no.

…the open attitude towards granting immigrants asylum is not matched by good opportunities on the labor market. An in-depth study by the daily paper Dagens Nyheter shows that many migrants struggle to find decent work even ten years after entering the country. …The median income for the refugees in the group was found to be as low as £880 a month. The family immigrants of refugees earned even less. Ten years after arriving in the country, their median income was merely £360 a month. These very low figures suggest that a large segment of the group is still relying on welfare payments. Dagens Nyheter can show that at least four out of ten refugees ten years after arrival are supported by welfare. The paper acknowledges that this is likely an underestimation.

So what’s the problem? Why are immigrants failing to prosper?

Nima suggests that government policies are the problem, creating perverse incentives for long-term dependency.

The combination of generous benefits, high taxes and rigid labour regulations reduce the incentives and possibilities to find work. Entrapment in welfare dependency is therefore extensive, in particular amongst immigrants. Studies havepreviouslyshownthat even highly educated groups of foreign descent struggle to become self-dependent in countries such as Norway and Sweden. …The high-spending model is simply not fit to cope with the challenges of integration.

The part about “highly educated groups” is particularly important since it shows that the welfare trap doesn’t just affect low-skilled immigrants (particularly when high tax rates make productive activity relatively unattractive).

The Nordic countries work relatively well (at the moment) I think because they are small and relatively homogeneous. I think it’s when democracies become large and start facing significant differences of opinion, that they inevitably break down into a conflict of groups trying to wield political influence over each other.

“Government is that great fiction…” and I’m sure you know the rest of Bastiat’s famous quote.

Now that Sweden is getting more and more immigrants, with a different cultural mindset, the policies that may have worked for the Swedes long into the future are going to become unsustainable much faster. I think the welfare politics and the culture it breeds will die along with the central banks, and the nearly unlimited political funding they enable, and I think we may see that in the next few decades. Hopefully world wars will disappear along with them as well.

And this doesn’t even address the problem of violent crime, particularly rape and sexual assault, associated with the immigrant population, which is actually a much bigger and more appalling story than the economic one.

The bottom line is: How is the Swedish growth trendline? How does it compare to average world growth?

Redistribution is a simple constant fraction while growth is an exponent. In elementary mathematics the exponent always wins over the constant multiplier over the longer term. And its victory is permanent and ever more decisive with every successive year.

“Yes we can” may be the inspirational motto of redistributionists but reality is that “No, you cannot outvote arithmetic”. At best, or at worst, depending on your point of view, you may find a delusional leader who can convince you to cast your vote against arithmetic.

So, again, the bottom line is: How is the Swedish growth trendline? Can it match average world growth of four percent annually in the long term? If not, then Sweden is in decline and its system is unsustainable regardless of what else voters do, believe, or get bamboozled into.

Sweden’s growth trendline seems to be about two percent. As it keeps on that trendline while the world keeps growing at four percent, in a mere thirty years Sweden’s relative ranking compared to the rest of the world will have declined by -43%. That is not a number they will be able to make up in any way through redistribution – and it’s PERMANENT, and ever increasing.

As the world moves forward, most voters, in most jurisdictions will choose redistribution over growth (some even under the delusional Paul Krugman like ideas that you can have both). The few that will escape are too difficult to predict a-priori (though I’m very interested in any insights anyone may have). Their escape from the vicious cycle of redistribution and decline will likely depend on serendipitous factors.

That is why staying mobile is the best approach. Let the Darwinian world of voter-lemmings sort itself out, then pick the winners and move there. My guess is that as the world keeps moving faster and faster, transitions from free markets to collectivism and vice-versa will become all the more frequent. That means that you will have to move ever more frequently. Looks like the world of future success belongs to economic mercenaries. Unbeknownst to most voter-lemmings the world over, this transition has already started.

“I want you to be here with me. I want us to hang out in Jannah. My wonderful brothers, take this decision, trust in Allah, sacrificing your money and your life for Allah, and you will receive the highest from Allah “

the quote is from an ISIS recruiting video designed to lure Swedish Muslims into jihad… the fellow narrating it was once a Swedish government funded mouthpiece for tolerance… that is… until he defected to ISIS…